(Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
The MHoC does not need another boring, vanilla member to be the Speaker, the MHoC needs a big personality who fully embraces every aspect of the game, has a genuine interest in the game, and wants the game to continue. I can do everything else the other candidates promise so I shall save you from the cliche begging lines, however, I promise to keep debating non-legislative items, keep being involved in the banter, keep making fun of my loveless life on Skype, keep telling you all about how I meet the trophy girls, and carrying on with more of the same in a more neutral way. I am the logical choice to change the MHoC from being a boring debating club to being an active, entertaining, and memorable experience for us all; let us rebuild the memorable times of the past we learn about wishing the same could happen again today.

Sounds compelling. Perhaps this amount of dedication should even be rewarded in some way, I'm just not sure if electing you the Speaker would really be a reward. Do you promise to throw your gown into Mt. Doom and seek medical help if it ever consumes you?

Being Speaker comes with an effective ban on commenting in a partisan way in here on any political developments, RL or MHoC, for the duration of your tenure. I have missed Brexit, Theresa May taking over, the election of Donald Trump and everything else that has happened in politics since the end of May 2016. How will you cope with this?

Also, the Speaker is required to not have an overly big personality whilst doing the job. The role is about making the MHoC run smoothly and fairly, so it's not all about you. How would you convince me that you are "vanilla" enough to be trusted as Speaker?

Obviously I intend to be partisan in my endeavours to deliver the one party state that I have promised. If I however fail to deliver these changes then I shall return to running the Speakership in a non-partisan way for the remainder of my term. However I feel that this solely applies to legislation and do not see why my position should stop me from commenting on real life issues whether that be in the bar or elsewhere.

I disagree that a Speaker must be vanilla. A Speaker should be able to joke around and have discussions with members, as long as they do not offend or insult, much the same as the RL Speaker does on occasion.

A Speaker is not there simply to be a robot, I strongly believe that bringing a more personal feel to the speakership would be beneficial to the house. I will actively engage with members and parties to ensure that the house runs smoothly, debate is encouraged and quality is kept to a high standard. Some ways I will do this is by having updates a 6pm (which will give the entire evening for the debate), by encouraging parties to not be afraid to submit legislation surrounding controversial issues (which always sparks the largest debates and involvement), and by actively working with all parties to improve the quality of the legislation they submit (whether that be formatting, ensuring things are properly defined, or pointing out contradictions). I believe I can do all this without bias or partisanship.

(Original post by Life_peer)
Sounds compelling. Perhaps this amount of dedication should even be rewarded in some way, I'm just not sure if electing you the Speaker would really be a reward. Do you promise to throw your gown into Mt. Doom and seek medical help if it ever consumes you?

I think I will have to because convincing members to change their vanilla ways is difficult. The story Byronic Hero tells of a Speaker changing manifestos to laugh at candidates is a perfect example of harmless acts of fun which are missing from today's MHoC.

(Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
I think I will have to because convincing members to change their vanilla ways is difficult. The story Byronic Hero tells of a Speaker changing manifestos to laugh at candidates is a perfect example of harmless acts of fun which are missing from today's MHoC.

Firstly, although there's no harm in a Speaker having a sense of humour, they're not there to entertain. And secondly, 'harmless acts of fun' are already present in the House. Why do we need the Speaker to create some themself?

(Original post by Quamquam123)
Firstly, although there's no harm in a Speaker having a sense of humour, they're not there to entertain. And secondly, 'harmless acts of fun' are already present in the House. Why do we need the Speaker to create some themself?

That is not a promise to create them, however, a joke bill, memes, and some bickering are not harmless acts of fun. I do not believe the Speaker should be some neutral figure who does Speakership duties but nothing else, the Speaker should be involved, take part in the fun, and be an entertainer like the Speakers of the past were we hear stories about.

(Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
As a question to the other candidates, when the election comes with the two candidates in, assuming you are not included in that election, which candidate would you vote for?

(Original post by Lime-man)
I don't want a speaker who engages in vanity projects while neglecting their job description. I want a speaker who will just do their job. Which of you can best do that and why?

(Nige, I don't want to hear about how you don't have a life, because that just makes me think that you want the job simply to have your "fix". I want something proper.)

Bear in mind though, that I don't have a vote, but potential voters will be reading your answers.

(Original post by toronto353)
I apologise to Saracen's Fez in advance for any negative answers (), but what three aspects of their predecessor's Speakership would each of the candidates retain and what three things would they do differently and why?

Retain:
- I would keep the rolling voting reviews that Fez had early on til he started slacking
- I would make love to sheep
- I would send daily updates

Differently:
- I wouldn't publicly argue with members over decisions I have made.
- I would post memes
- I would update Hansard more regularly.

Contrary to what Nigel thinks, we don't need someone special or a massive personality behind the role of Speaker. It is fundamentally an administrative role with the opportunity to make changes the speaker and the rest of the house feels necessary. The house needs a strong but stable candidate with experience but also freshness, and that is exactly what I am.